On 04/28/2011 11:36 AM, Greg Larkin wrote: > On 3/28/11 6:03 PM, Stewart Smith wrote: >> On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 14:30:48 -0400, Greg Larkin <[email protected]> wrote: >>> One thing I remember from creating the port a while back is that Drizzle >>> had a large number of configure-time options. Does it still have them, >>> and how important is it that they are exposed to the end user before the >>> build? The FreeBSD ports system has a text-based options selector that >>> they can be added to, but if there's a common set that should be >>> enabled, I can just hardcode them in the port Makefile. > >> For the most part, most of the plugins with dependencies can be built if >> the dependencies are installed and otherwise it doesn't matter (can't >> remember how this maps back to FreeBSD ports...). For the most part, the >> default ./configure options should be fine. > > > Hello all, > > After a bit of a delay, I want to let you know that I'm working on > upgrading the FreeBSD port of drizzle to the latest version. If I run > into any questions, I'll ping you along the way. > > One question I have now regards the current status of libdrizzle. It > appears to be folded into the main drizzle distro, so I expect I can > remove it from the drizzle port as a dependency. Is there any need to > keep the libdrizzle port around for standalone use at this point? If > not, I'll set it to DEPRECATED and eventually remove it from the tree.
No reason to keep the libdrizzle port around at all - anything you can do to get rid of it would be stellar. Thanks! Monty _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
